What are the flaws of Market Socialism? why was Yugoslavia less developed than its western neighbors?

>And you're fixated on Marxism like a child

Once again, you show you have no understanding of Political theory. you seem to think all communism is marxism, ignoring

Syndicalism
Market Socialism
Maoism
Democratic Socialism
Stalinism

And all the smaller ones like Bukharinism and Hoxhaism.

No, it's just easier you call it all 'Marxist'

Politics are goodies and baddies, right?

>The rise and fall of eastern European communist states had no dependence on the bordering Soviet Union whatsoever.
Makes sense coming from people who believe that one only has one's self to blame for their problems.

Bitch I'm not interested in the million iterations of Christianity or all it's splinter cults. And I'm not interested in your role-playing either.

Move on

How about you stop listening to post-Reagan neocon pundits.

Your kind seems to be fixated on opposing any socially progressive proposals under the pretext of them being 'socialist'. Maybe you should stop repeating tired and tried memes.

>I'm too dumb, but I'll just pretend it's all the same to look smart

Firstly, Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union WERE ENEMIES

Secondly, you called it the Soviet Union, but now you're pretending you did it intentionally to save face, despite yugoslavia and the USSR being totally seperate

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tito–Stalin_Split

Thirdly, Yugoslavia survived to 2006.

>Enemies
>totally separate guise
1989-1992

Yeah sure commie.

Fine. You know that literally no one is stopping you and your gay for Che friends from going and being communists right?

Go do it. Just stop trying to wreck working systems and forcing people whom have no interest in your sad bullshit.

Get your ass to Venezuela and put your fantasies into reality.

They WERE you reatrd. This isn't even uncommon knowledge.

Due to Tito refusing to sign the Warsaw pact, Stalin even threatened INVASION. Tito eventually created the Non aligned movement, a third alliance, with India and Egypt.

Just because you're historically illiterate doesn't mean everyone else is.

>Yeah sure commie.

Why do 14 year old neocons say 'Commie'? Do they think they sound like John Wayne?

>Fine. You know that literally no one is stopping you and your gay for Che friends from going and being communists right?

I know. I am.

>Go do it. Just stop trying to wreck working systems and forcing people whom have no interest in your sad bullshit.

>Working systems

usdebtclock.org/

>Get your ass to Venezuela and put your fantasies into reality.

Maybe I should take them to Denmark instead, or perhaps China?

Venezuela failed due to an over reliance on oil, not socialism.

Yeah sure whatever, know of any wars between them, real or cold?

It's almost as if yugoslavia was under Protection by the US!

It's almost like wars are fought through diplomacy in the post nuclear age!

>debt bubbles work

Seriously, just take 10 minutes out of your day and read the fucking wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tito–Stalin_Split

Nothin wrong with a little competition what are you communist?

What?

You realize Tito's form of communism, Market Socialism, is FOUNDED on competitiveness.

That's the point of the thread.

States nominal ideologies aren't really reflective of what they actually practice. The degree of arguments about how some democratic republics policies aren't this or aren't that should be applied here also. Not to mention that it was still within a regional sphere hostile to the NATO powers which is one of the crucial aspects of why socialist countries and many others encounter trouble.

Tito was easily the most devoted to his own ideology. Analysis of the integrity of ideology should be done on the leader by leader basis, and it's hard to deny Tito was no sell out.

Still it was probably more dependent on neighboring socialist state's economies than the rest of the world.

Socialism is the flaw because socialism does not work.

Nope. More of his trade was with Italy than the Eastern bloc.

Socialistic practices work quite well like various types of regulation in place in continental European countries. Unregulation is what sucks and makes people miserable.

Proof or is this another unsubstantiated meme like the US buying most of Venezuela's oil.

Homey those policies are too knew to be 'working' yet.

They are bolstered by healthy economies and strong homogenous cultures. Or they were. In fact the most socialist countries are targets for millions of economic migrants purposefully breaking immigration laws to attain these wonderful free gibs me dats all at the expense of the citizen tax payers.

Their governments now literally rob their own citizenry to provide for foreigners in the most suicidal social gambit a people have ever undertaken.

Social unrest and strife is now common place with.

Those nation states will not likely survive another generation in their current recognized forms.

>Yugoslavia's trade policy followed the complete realignment of its foreign policy after expulsion from the Cominform in 1948. By the 1960s, structural reform and entry into the international market had broken down many economic and social barriers between Yugoslavia and the outside world. Although the Soviet Union remained Yugoslavia's largest trading partner throughout the 1980s, the emergence in 1986 of West Germany as Yugoslavia's top source of imports
As I should've mentioned, they reached rapprochement and began gas trade with the USSR after Tito died.

photius.com/countries/croatia/economy/yugoslavia_former_economy_trading_partners.html

Blah blah blah muh foreigners.
The Mediterranean countries preserve the best semblance of European culture, spending their time sipping coffee and harass the authorities into submission every time they pass some objectionable legislature. Meanwhile rapefugees flood the North but Germany holds most of the wealth. Iceland isn't having none of that rapefugee crap though. Even Aussieland is seeing a huge influx of refugees but still does better than the US.

>Be American
>Get lip busted when being forcefully removed by state euncuh slave guard for violating the NAP.
Don't see this happening much in socially progressive realms.

The people of Europe wee never allowed a vote or a say on the mass invasion. They were of ignored out right, then threatened and called names by their own governments elected to represent them.

Even arrested for speaking out in some cases.

That's a sick and disgusting violation. A betrayal of epic proportions. And for that reason I hope that Europe experiences an intense fall greater and more complete than the full of Rome.

You're insane. You actually think this model will work.

Cry more faggot. A good deal of them support the measures anyway. That's their problem. It's called representative democracy.
Also this isn't about social policy but economic.

See you actually hate Europeans. You're fine with their invasion because you consider that they deserve it.

But when millions of Europeans invaded other lands and displaced the natives and assaulted them you considered it oppression and evil colonialism.

You're sort of mind ficked. Not brainwashed per we but realistically stuck with a head full of cognitive dissonance.

I'm not sure what using European tax money to literally subsidize the lives of millions of invaders has to do with benefiting the native people.

I wish I could move a family of people you don't know into your home and make you pay for their every need.

That would make me so happy. To blame every failure or conflict on you as well.

>Invasion
The only invasions that have actually taken place in modern times were at the hands of fellow Europeans.
Quit trying to gain points through emotional appeal.

>hundreds of thousands of niggers and towelheads coming into Europe isn't an invasion

...

Millions of people literally swapped continents and just walked into Europe demanding to be fed, clothed and housed.

And they are busy busy busy setting up their own insular networks and organizations to conflict further with the natives.

It is invasion you illiterate

>an incursion by a large number of people or things into a place or sphere of activity.
>an unwelcome intrusion into another's domain

Just admit that you have an exotic fetish and prefer the benefit of brown people over white solely because they are brown.

Just get it all out.

No they don't work "quite well", stop talking out of your ass.

>only neocucks say commie
stfu you commie piece of shit.

Knowing concretely why certain economies fail in in what areas gives us case studies in how not to organize ourselves economically
"cuz socialism" says nothing, because it does not tell us what exactly what that means and how it manifested itself in practice, and thus what was deficient in that practice.
This is simply good scholarship, undergrad.

>hinging on one aspect of social policy
>ignoring all the other sensible and careful economic practices while rightists pass exploitative legislation under the cover of preserving national sovereignty.
Sensible economic policy and safety nets for the public has nothing to do with purposely letting migrants in. Why haven't conservatives done nothing about immigration until now either? They only appeal to it for voter points and once they get into power they claim that if they act to harshly the businesses will leave. It's just another side of the same coin but progressive policies tend to be supported by somewhat informed people of all income brackets. The two sided scheme forces them into accepting the least exploitative of the two while making the other side purposefully undesirable.

Some argumental ability you got there.

You should stop trying to fix every minor problem with the system. Society is built around ideas put forth by (((intellectuals))) and rejected /implemented by the common man. Socialism says fuck it why should I have to compromise or explain myself to the common man, let alone listen to his uneducated objections?

Also, to all other shit for brains mocking others for not knowing "true socialism" Where do most people that escape socialism move to? And remember, there were A LOT of (socialist) countries at one point.

Hint : it has 2 continents named after it.

People from all over the world escaped, moved here, and told us all about socialism, none of it was good. Not trusting socialism is engrained into the public psyche for good fucking reason.

>Syndicalism
I do not know enough about this to debunk it, but given that it is socialist, I can only imagine it can fail
>Market Socialism
This relies too heavily on "good will" and control of trade in a society where trade cannot be controlled because there is no central government
>Maoism
Is dead. China is not communist anymore. Their economy is strictly capitalist.
>Democratic Socialism
Is dying. Liberalism is killing it, because even modern marxists know a socialist economy cannot work.
>Stalinism
The results speak for themselves.

I would probably be labeled a socialist, because I believe in some of the tenets of socialism, but only used as a balance and/or counter-measure of capitalism.

First of all, the country didn't really have a market, it had a semblance of a market. Most of the things were run by the federal government, and later (after 1974) by the republics.
Self-management in Yugoslavia never advanced beyond the confines of the larger state monopoly economy.
Tho, in theory the companies were worker run, they were managed by a manager who was appointed by the party, and generally not qualified for the job. These managers would steal money and live lavish lifestyles. They had to have the support of the workers to keep their place, so the main point was wages. Wages were very high, but that meant the company had to borrow money, and cut costs elsewhere. After a few decades the companies couldn't afford amortization and the "means of production" were practically useless. There was no need to progress, no need to fight for anything. The purpose of the companies wasn't to make goods or provide services. It was employment and distribution. Unemployment was solved by shoving people out of the country as guest workers to WEST GERMANY.
The workers had no incentive to work, the managers had no incentive to be efficient. It was basically impossible to fire anyone, and each of the workers was in line to get an apartment in a commieblock.
Yugoslavia at first glance was better off than the rest of the Communist countries. However, this was due to abundance of western products. The Yugoslav trade deficit was 17% of the GDP, and the country kept going into more and more debt.
At first the debt was being serviced by the money sent home by the people who went to Germany to work, but even this was not enough, and Yugoslavia defaulted in 1983 (however they didn't inform the public at large).
What followed was a spiral of unemployment, inflation, and lower wages. Tho Ante Markovic barely managed to stop the collapse, it was too late, the damage had been done, and local politicians have already taken power on the waves of dissatisfaction.

Long story short:
No one had the incentive to actually work. They made shitty products. No one wanted change. No one wanted efficiency. The country was run on US aid as one of the counters to the USSR. When they money stopped poring in (cuz Raegan) and they couldn't pay off the debt everything started going to shit

>First there was the fragmentation of the national market into eight sub-markets, each with their own taxes, foreign exchange system, investment policies and regulations...Yugoslavia adopted an economic system which promoted the disintegration of the country. The result was wasteful investments, loss of economies of scale and potential gains from specialization...
(Socialist Planning 3rd edition by Michael Ellman page 55)

"Market Socialism" itself is a meme anyhow. There cannot be generalized commodity exchange or private means of production for a system to be socialist. That's not to say supply and demand will not be factors but they would be limited mainly to consumer goods

Check my postThe job market was completely fucked.